Canon EOS RP review

Intro

The Canon EOS RP is among the smallest and lightest full-frame cameras on the market, and is the least expensive full-frame camera at launch, ever. And though its specifications aren't going to set the world on fire, the RP is a likable little camera with solid JPEG image quality that will be a fine photographic companion for casual users and those already within the Canon ecosystem looking for a compact second body.

Key specifications:

26.2MP Dual Pixel CMOS sensor

4K/24p (from 1.7x crop region)

4 fps continuous shooting with continuous AF (5 without)

Pupil detection AF in continous/Servo AF mode

AF rated to -5EV (with an F1.2 lens)

Digic 8 processor

2.36M dot OLED viewfinder

Fully-articulated 1.04M dot touchscreen

Twin command dials

CIPA rated to 250 shots per charge

Accounting for inflation, the EOS RP (body-only) is priced within $75 of the original 6MP Canon Digital Rebel / EOS 300D that was released back in 2003 - a camera that really helped bring large-sensor digital photography to the masses. And like the Digital Rebel, the EOS RP promises to offer a bit of a stripped-down shooting experience in exchange for its large full-frame image sensor at a reasonable cost. It's worth noting, however, that the earlier Rebel debuted with a range of relatively low-cost lenses designed for it - not so much the case today.

While other manufacturers are moving ever further up-market with more expensive and capable devices, the EOS RP stands alone in providing more novice or budget-constrained users with access to the shallower depth-of-field that full frame cameras offer over those with APS-C or smaller sensors. There are caveats, though, in that the RP is a poor choice for those looking to shoot video, and the native lens selection is lacking at this time.

The EOS RP is available now at a price of $1299 body-only, $1999 with the EF adapter and a 24-105mm F3.5-5.6 lens, and $2399 with the native RF 24-105mm F4L lens.

What's new and how it compares

The EOS RP has a lot of ingredients we've seen in other Canon cameras before, but certainly not at this price point.

Comments

Focusing system review is taking its time. Better so we could have a clear idea about that. Touch and drag usability and efficiency in stills. And with roughly 4700 focus points, the focus point in touch and drag will scroll smoothly under one’s thumb I guess.

The focusing system part of the review is taking its time. Hope the touch and drag stills experience and usability can be delved into. As well as where’s the advantage to having roughly 4700 focus points compared to between 400 and 700 on other systems.

Dynamic range of Canon’s newer APS-C cameras such as the 77D or m50 is much better than the 6D II or RP. RP comes with hand grip and adapter until end of this month. Although they might extend that offer. Who knows.

That's easy. Just google search the camera model name along with dxo mark. Dynamic range is measured in stops. The newest Canon sensors have about 13.5 stops, about 1 stop behind Sony/Nikon but essentially very good. I think the 6d2 is slightly worse than the original 6d around 11 stops. Its still workable but I couldn't see the point upgrading (from 5d classic) to anything below the 5d4/ Eos R.

@emfor I'm not sure your link is evidence of nonsense discussion on dpreview. Leaving aside out-of-camera jpegs, almost any slr camera could produce similar or better photos. My 5D classic raws can produce that much range for example, especially with noise reduction applied to shadows. But the 5d4 sensor has so much more to give, it's in a different league if you know what to do with it.

But it's expensive. I don't do enough professional work to justify having it sat on my shelf, but there's no reasonable downgrade imo. I made the choice to go with the 5d4 mainly due to the dynamic range and resolution versus the 5d3. I nearly bought a 5ds but the dynamic range and easier workflow (less strain on PC) steered me back to the 5d4. I sort of regret that choice and may pick up a 5ds one day...

But the eos rp has no advantage over the 5d3, 6d, 5d2 for my purposes.

@Goodmeme "...almost any slr camera could produce similar or better photos..." Did you mean similar/better photos than those you find on the page I linked?Well in a pure technical sense other cameras may record more details or a wider DR, and probably the RAW files of the camera used (Olympus Pen F) will also do. BUT, my point is that this is not important for taking great pictures as the examples show. They are unprocessed (apart from instant in body JPEG conversion), taken under hard light with very deep shadows - not pushed by 3 or 5 stops as many sensor freaks consider necessary - and blown out highlights - so not exposed to the right to record as much information as possible and process it later. But they are great! It is the the composition and the 'right' exposure (which indeed may produce deep shadows or blown out highlights) that makes great pictures. Briefly, it is the photographer who makes great pictures.

I don't wish to be contrary for the sake of it, but I'd personally be much more comfortable taking such pictures in raw and with a higher dynamic range sensor.

I don't want to make disparaging comments on the photos as they're not bad, but using straight out of camera jpegs as a guide to what can be done is not sensible imo. Also how do you know the camera didn't use heavy noise reduction, or highlight recovery methods during exposure? But more to the point, did you notice these photos were taken in broad daylight, yet the shadows are completely black, not necessarily as an artistic choice...

The irony of the dynamic range debate is that most photos look better with more contrast and deeper blacks. So I typically add more contrast in post than with my old 5d classic, But it's nice to have the choice.

@Goodmeme "...I'd personally be much more comfortable taking such pictures in raw and with a higher dynamic range sensor... So I typically add more contrast in post ..., But it's nice to have the choice." That's the crux of the matter. Instead learning how to get the picture right immediately (as OOC JPEG) too many (here) resort on doing it in post - and hence require DR, high res (for later cropping) etc. to preserve the possibility to do so. And this way many people do not effectively learn the skills to take the picture right immediately - or maybe (?) are too lazy to apply their skills when shooting (because it is more comfortable to do it in post)?

So try it, let yourself be inspired by MT and take OOC JPEGs and try to get it right immediately - you can always let your camera save the RAW as backup.

"…it is forcing me to adopt a rather filmic approach to photography and the subtle but important difference of imagining what can be now, rather than what can be with a little work. Interestingly, I find my compositional balance has improved since I am no longer thinking about fixing things in post with a gradient. ... but at the same time overall image quality is slightly compromised as I am exposing to output rather than to maximise data collection. Still, the tradeoff in time saved and other opportunities explored seems to be worthwhile so..." [MT]

@emfor It's fair enough if that's what someone wants to do I suppose. I'd rather save time when I was taking the picture, concentrating on composition rather than exposure.

No camera in the world can post process raw files like I can with Lightroom. That is where the magic happens and an ordinary picture becomes something that delights people and which they are proud to display in their homes...I've never taken a photo I couldn't improve in post.

Well, needless to say that you can achieve results with a raw processor that you cannot get straight out of the camera. This was not my point. The question is what "ordinary picture" and "improve" (in post) means. But this is probably a matter of taste. So I think we agree that we disagree ;-)

Why review it? Dynamic range is the same as the 6d2, so this camera is DOA, or relegated to beginners, according to DPR. The whole review will have the typical condescending Canon tone, and those dreaded R lenses are too big, heavy, and expensive, doesn't make any sense on a compact body... pretty much sums it up?

You forgot a few things I.e the terrible continuous shooting speeds, lack of weather sealing, mediocre evf, no ibis, dire battery life, no 1080p 24, and a general feeling of a camera where features are removed to force customers to buy higher priced models

Bought it. Payed the price. Loved it since the first click. Only 450 grams, can use all my existing EF lenses. Added the RF 24-105.

Its silent shutter, compact design, folding screen, enables me to take pictures in a non intrusive way. Simple operation and great results. Did 620 clicks my first shoot last week (1,5 battery), took me allmost no post production.

Software and wifi support are not up to par yet, Canon NL was not ready for software download. But i assume that to be solved soon. Sony A7-ii was no option: lacking touch screen. Canon R too heavy and bulky, A7iii too pricy.

Just to clarify for people, RickBnl probably isn't talking about the "Silent Shutter" mode which is the electronic shutter that is only available in an auto mode. The RP's mechanical shutter is relatively quiet especially in contrast to DSLRs.

Rubber dials the price you quote includes the lens adapter. That is enough of a deal for me to buy. Cameras are a major purchase but that does not mean that those who want one will be deterred. This is particularly these case if you have lots of nice L glass. Time will tell but I would take a bet the RP will do well.

The adaptor is worthless to me because I don't have any EF lenses. For you it's possibly the catalyst for the sale.

The problem I foresee here is Canon 'talking to istelf'. Whilst selling to existing EF users might generate income it is not a viable strategy for any company. They must target new users and Canon is no different.

This is where I see the RP as being a slightly compromised offering. Would you recommend it to a friend? I wouldn't. I would recommend an M series camera plus a holiday. :) Or a camera from another manufacturer.

RubberDials - I see where you are coming from. Making systems change is no small step and from that stand point why would you recommend it? I get that new customers are important too.

I myself would recommend it. Being an early adopter is always less strait forward and carries some risks. These need to be balanced against the cost of change, and also the anticipation that the system will evolve and tech will in general begin plateau. I really do not think that there will be (at this price point) very much to differentiate between FF Mirrorless cameras going forward, yes there are more featured cameras but after you press the shutter the IQ is very similar and there is PP to follow.

Most reviews and comments about canon are very negative and disparaging. I do respect we all see things according to our needs preferences etc. My lived experience has always been better than the reviews. My 7Dmkii, 5dMkiv and 6Dii were all slated, but all work better than described in practice.

George, there is a relativism to this debate. The cameras you mention were not slated in a vacuum but in relation to other products. The fact that they served you well is neither here nor there to anyone else but profoundly significant to you. Of course I get that.

If your name includes your birth date, you'll remember a time when Canon wasn't the dominant name in photography. That time has come again. People should use what they want, but the truth is they will find better value going forward with other mirrorless systems - Canon simply doesn't have the sensor technology to make genuinely competitive mirrorless cameras at this time.

The R scored 79% in the DPR test, which is the lowest score of any mid-range FF camera ever. The reviewers are not biased - their score reflects their experiences with other brands and models and it's pretty damning. How loyal are you? I'm quite loyal to Sony, but I wouldn't buy their products if I was sure there was something better. And why should I?

Rubberdials the problem I have with the logic is that I do not see any differences in my images that correspond to a score. I sell images, shoot weddings and events, some corporate jobs too. What is clear to my customers there is no concept of a better or worse camera signature in the images.For me this is what really begs the difference on what better actually mean in practice. I do on the other hand get that gear is very personal to the user, for me I really can’t see any real world advances or disadvantages in using a given system, it comes down to what works for the individual.

Canon cameras are always better than the specs indicate; one might say the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Sony tends to the opposite; the specs don't tell the whole story, and the whole of the camera is less than the sum of its parts.

That is why Sony promoters always speak in terms of specs, like a robot, or someone with talking points. Look at that one commenter on the RP: "Loved it since the first click." That's what you want to hear. That's a real affirmation.

And George is right: funny in how with all of the Canon criticism by some, Canon users go about taking very fine images without complaint, including most pro's. I know a pro who uses a 5d mark iii and he showed me some recent photos from a dog show and they are spectacular. Seems this supposedly inferior Canon tech was more than good enough for him. And guess what? He doesn't care about what Sony offers.

@George: you are absolutely right regarding “images vs score” - this is what I tell people here since the beginning of time. It is always amusing, as during photo workshops nobody (well, there are extremely few lucky shots, but that’s just luck, never a science fact) can guess the camera maker from a simple A4 or A3+ print... And there is more: this is also true when showing images on a (very) large flat panel. The latest funny moment: one “junior” identifed “a very noisy Canon sensor” - but the image was a b/w scan taken with a Leica film camera, 41 years ago. General laugh within the audience, you can imagine...

""Canon cameras are always better than the specs indicate; one might say the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Sony tends to the opposite; the specs don't tell the whole story, and the whole of the camera is less than the sum of its parts.""

'Specs' are not something that exist separately to the camera - they are the camera. There is nothing to the camera other than its specifications. It does not have a soul or a consciousness.

You have really gone to a ridiculous place to preach your Canon=good, Sony=bad mantra. You are now evoking a 'spirit' or 'ghost in the machine' to justify purchasing product that is demonstrably inferior in testing.

The EOS R got 79% - the lowest score DPR has ever given in the FF mid-range camera category. Presumably you think the camera should have gained a higher score and perhaps a medal for features that the reviewers didn't see because they don't have an eye in the centre of their forehead or work for Canon.

@rubberdial The lowest score, where the difference between highest and lowest score is not meaningful in reality. And where its also the cheapest camera for people who have been shooting canon since 1987

I do think it's interesting that the most direct competitor to the RP is the A7II, an over four-year-old camera which currently costs $300 less and still outperforms the RP in several respects.

I'd be interested to see what a $1300 A7-series camera would look like if it were released in early 2019 rather than late 2014. The A7III hasn't come down at all in price since its release (selling just fine at full price, I guess) but I imagine that right now Sony could make something pretty darn close to as good as an A7III for what Canon is asking for the RP. I wonder if they have any plans to release a new lower-cost A7. Probably not, since the A7II is still right there. A software refresh of the A7II would be nice, though.

Yes, I think Sony really needs to focus on ergonomics and build quality for their next generation of cameras. Their cameras are technically excellent—I think it that from a specifications standpoint it's clear that Sony is leading the pack—but the body designs aren't up to the level of other major manufacturers, and that's a shame. I hope they realize that and are devoting serious R&D resources to improving their user experience for the next generation of Alphas. They need to be willing to really shake up their existing designs and come out with something that's as different as it has to be. I don't think anybody is really in love with the current Alphas from a look-and-feel perspective.

When discussing the design of Sony FF milcs, most people ignore the fact that these cameras are iterative designs and were created based on an entirely different design principle originally.

When Sony launched the A7 and A7r, there was no existing FF milc product or even a assumption that FF was the photographer's destination. They created this product category and the body design reflected the users they were targeting - essentially older shooters and film users. The cameras were designed to resemble film bodies, even down to putting the shutter release on the top plate.

Across generations the body design has changed. Sony has done a lot to round off the design but is unlikely to make a G9 style body.

I actually really like the A7 series design, but the last Canon camera I owned was the A1 and that felt very much like an A7III.

The a72 is comparing on paper spec only. I'm sure if Canon still sold the 5dII today for $1000, it will also compare favorably on this spec list.For the price of the Sony, you get a much heavier and bigger camera with worse AF, worse menu, No touch tilt -only screen, no weather resistance, worse video specs, worse colour, worse IQ at higher iso (just see on dpreview iso comparison how quickly the A72 falls apart compared to the RP) to name but a few of the old tech 'features'.

Half of that stuff you listed just plain isn't true though. And anyway I never said that the A7II was better in every respect, just some of them. Which considering that it's over four years old is pretty surprising. And of course, it's also $300 cheaper.

All of what I listed can be verified in specifications, various reviews, tear-downs etc. It is $300 cheaper because it is a 4 year old camera for pete's sake... What Sony is saying is : "The best second hand camera you can buy is a NEW Sony" :-). Also it is not $300 cheaper for a non-Sony user; taking into account you still have to buy THIRD PARTY adapters for your lenses, new flashes and accessories; less you want to buy all new lenses (MUCH more $$) and exclude your self from the MASSIVE numbers of EF or F glass out there...

Rubberdials. Ok, but that is a different argument; I will not disagree with that. At least the iii is only a year old or so; so very current still. But in a few months or a year's time the RP will probably go for much less..and once again - the purchase price to go from Canon (or Nikon) to Sony is much more than just the body price... At the moment the RP is a helluva bargain if you are a Canon user...

You know, in terms of general body shape, they could do worse than to take the RX10's shape as a starting point. It's much more of a blobby, ergonomic DSLR shape than the A7 cameras are, and I find it very comfortable. I always feel like I have a secure grip on it, even when it's dangling from my fingertips. I never feel like there's a chance I might drop it, and I never have. It feels like something that was made to fit a human hand. There are certainly areas where it could be improved, but there's a reason that most professional DSLRs are kind of rounded and blobby.

@anticipation_of, if spec is your only criteria, then yeah, I see your point.

However, in the hand the A7ii is a not a comfortable camera, the operation is just awful, and the UI....don't go there. I'm not a fan of the R or RP, but their handling is so much better. Personally, wouldn't buy any of these mirrorless cameras yet.

(And yeah, the fanboys are gonna jump on me for daring to criticize.).

Maybe it's like the M50 I bought as an intermediate solution and test-run for mirrorless camera with viewfinder: You expect some crippled very technical system but after a few days you just love that camera as a tool which helps you to get the images that you want without too much unnecessary effort.

The original EOS M was IMO a computer with an EF-M bayonet, a little bit clumsy to operate especially with FD lenses but the M50 does this with ease and I expect the RP will do it a little bit better.

If I were in the US maybe I had bought an RP soon but in Germany the price is substantially higher and they deliver the wrong adapter: I would really embrace an offer with the control ring adapter which is a real improvement in ergonomics.

I recently bought a used 7D Mark II. I liked it a lot more than I thought I would. I realize now I should have sold my entire kit and migrated to Sony. Then I would have been part of the DPReview “in” crowd. My daughter goes to middle school. This comment section has a very similar vibe.

-@dansclicCameras are parts of SYSTEMS and in my case I have invested several thousands of EUR / $ into Canon lenses which is not too much but substantial for an "amateur". Switching to Sony (and no I am not interested in using EF glass with 3rd party adapters) means to invest 10000 EUR/$ for their pricey lenses which are not always available.

@Michael B 66: Well said. I would not pay full price for a 7D Mark II. But its capabilities were ideal for what I needed and the price was right. Plus it works beautifully with all my lenses. Why would I spend thousands of dollars switching systems or using my existing lenses subobtimally for some theoretical improvement in capability that does not matter to me? My camera is a tool. I need it to do a job. It doesn't live in a display case and its spec sheet is not framed and shown in a place of prominence in my living room.

Dianeimagen - silly you. Making a purchase decision based on your needs, budget, and workflow. Don't you know you should be looking at the spec sheet and listening to various experts who frequent this column who claim Canon's cameras are universally useless? All the "cool" people are buying ABC - Anything But Canon.

Well, maybe you could also see this : a second hand full frame Nikon costs less than 1000 usd, has a battery good for at least 800 shots, etc. If size isn’t your concern, I would think twice before going mirrorrless.

For macro and generally for non-standard compositions I really like to place AF fields where I need them and not accept a manufacturers prepositioned AF field.

I really enjoy the freedom of choice and - I can tell only about DPAF - it really works much much better in AF predictability/reliability than with all AF DSLRs I used. It is the first time I really feel supported by a camera ...And I think holds true with ALL mirrorless cameras of EVERY manufacturer.

On this discussion see the usual brand debates and comparisons, saying well, brand X over here is still better on this spec, or brand Y over here offers this at a certain price.

But that too often ignores the reality of the camera market. The camera market is shrinking; there are not many new buyers starting from scratch. There are some but I would say that most people buying cameras these days are already invested in at least one system or another.

So for someone already owning a Canon DSLR, and this would be a far larger number than new entrants to the market, it really doesn't matter what other brands offer. Most consumers who own a Canon DSLR are happy with it, have lenses for it, and this Canon RP offers them a relatively affordable chance to get into mirrorless and use those same lenses seamlessly. It even comes with the adapter for free.

So the more relevant question for most will be if it's worth it for them to go into mirrorless.

I think you are underestimating how many Sony users are former Canon DSLR users. My point is that if you are a Canon DSLR user, the RP isn't the only choice for you. I am a Canon DSLR user who is happily using Sony mirrorless, and adapting my Canon EF lenses to Sony bodies with no problems. As for cost, an A7II ($998) with Sigma MC-11 adapter ($249) is comparable in price to the RP ($1299), but the A7II gives all my non-stabilized EF lenses stabilization. And I also get access to all the native E-mount lenses available as well as the ability to add a battery grip (which I can't do with the RP). My point is that the RP is definitely not the only option for Canon DSLR users, nor is the RP (or R) necessarily the best option either. In fact, I would say that the majority of Sony MILC users are former Canon DSLR users. We, as consumers, have more options now, and it's nice not to be tied to a single brand's cameras/lenses.

@T3: I think you overestimate how many people have switched from Canon to Sony. We know that Canon's market share has held roughly the same and even increased a small amount these last few years. So there is no proof of some great exodus to Sony.

Now sure, Canon users were the largest base of the market, and so probably contributed the largest numbers of users who switched (although probably not percentage wise). But I would also say that most who were inclined to switch already have, when Sony was the only FF MILC in town. Whatever you may think of the Canon offerings, they surely slowed down any attrition that may have been occurring. Nothing was better for Sony than zero competition.

Most people are not gear and spec sheet obsessed like we are. If you shoot Canon you are going to stick with them as long as you've been satisfied and haven't had any major problems. That's the experience of most Canon users.

@T3: to further elaborate, let me analogize with my experience with other types of products that I am not so into like cameras. Take cars. I like cars, but I am not some car nerd. I try to buy a good brand and then I will keep it as long as it meets my needs and doesn't have any major problems. I don't care if there are other cars on the market that may have an edge in certain specs and I don't go searching for that information.

I'm the same way with my refrigerator, washer/dryer, electric razor, TV set, etc. It's the same way with most people about their camera gear. Everyone I know that owns Canon, from pro to amateur, loves it, doesn't worry about specs and lab tests, isn't looking to change, and is very satisfied with the images it produces. For these users, if they consider mirrorless at all, they will look to Canon and Canon only.

Who do you think all of these Sony sales are going to? Seriously, do you think all these Sony sales are going to people who've never owned or touched an ILC before? Do you think all these sales are only going to former Sony A-mount DSLR users? LOL. You're in total denial. It is a reasonable statistical reality that a big chunk of these Sony sales are going to people who are, or were, Canon DSLR users because there are a lot of Canon DSLR users out there. And for many of us, it's not even "switching" because we can simply use our Canon EF lenses on a Sony body via an adapter just like we would if we were using an EOS R or RP.

@Thoughts R Us - By the way, you're terrible at making predictions. Here's what you said six months ago:

"The real loser is Sony. Canon will crush Sony from here on out. And Sony gets no more converts from Canon or Nikon. Maybe a few switching back. To new users, they will no longer see Sony as the only game in town if you want smaller high quality FF mirrorless. They will see the names of the giants and many will choose them over Sony.

Nikon will outsell Sony. I can guarantee you that Canon will outsell Sony by a very wide margin. Sony will be consigned to small share of the FF mirrorless market; they've had 100% with no competition. Now they will are going to get besieged by all sides. Even Panasonic will swoop in and take away the video shooters from Sony."

@T3: I think it's hilarious and am honored that you bother to dig up and quote me from months ago. Thanks! Second, I still stand by that. Sony market share has already shrunk; they are still behind Canon by a country mile, and give Canon time and they will unseat Sony in FF MILC.

Here's a quote from the admin of Canon Rumors, who obviously has his likes but who also generally tells it like it is, and is pretty connected:The EOS R and EOS RP are both selling exceptionally well considering there are only 4 native RF mount lenses currently available. Yes, Canon is behind in the segment, but within 2-3 years, they're going to have a full EOS R/RF system. They'll also be #1 in the segment by then as well.

The EOS R system has existed for 198 days and there are already 10 lenses and two bodies announced. They are well ahead of where Sony was when they launched the A7 series 1983 days ago.

@T3: BTW, since you asked, I think the majority of buyers of the A7III are people who had another Sony mirrorless, either FF or APS-C, prior to that. It's only anecdotal, but that fits the profile of the people I know who have bought the Sony.

Remember, at this time, the market is shrinking, and most companies are only selling to their existing customers. There is very little switching.

Sony has peaked. Just this past week a report came from Sony of Germany that they expect to sell less cameras this year than last. And they will focus more on APS-C this year and FF. Why?

Sony had 5 years to try to make inroads; they made a valiant try, they did build a customer base, but in the end they fell way short.

Keep in mind, the A7III was introduced more than a year ago. And yet, it's still a top seller. Sony has peaked? No, that applies more to Canon and Nikon's launches. See how far you have to go down these lists to find the Nikon Z6/Z7 or Canon EOS R.

You are clearly a person who can not accept change. Any disruption to the status quo clearly causes you stress. Me, I've come to realize that the only constant is change. In the manual SLR days, I used Nikon. In the AF SLR era, I switched to Canon like many others did. Now in the mirrorless era, I and many others have moved to Sony. The good news is that the transition is easier than ever thanks to smart adapters.

T3 - we have all read your irrefutable amazon/B&H proofs before. You must be the only person who is convinced about your own propaganda and hyperbole. I wonder why you even bother with canon threads, you clearly have no interest and all you do is bleat on about Sony. Surely you must realise that those not every one cares or is interested in Sony, otherwise they would be gushing about a Sony reviews. (Which they are not) If I laboured as you do with your anti canon dogmas , but about Sony on the Sony Emount forum, I would be banned. Surely you can enjoy your Sony with like minded people spare others who don’t give a toss about Sony your turgid sermons?

George you bring up a good point. I don't know why someone totally invested in Sony, and I mean emotionally as well, as T3 even bothers with threads on Canon equipment, beating the same horse to death.

@T3: you can cherry pick your data, but here are the facts: Sony had zero completion in FF MILC and now has a whole lot, and by definition has lost market share. Canon is way ahead of where Sony was when they started out in FF mirrorless. In the overall camera market, the needle seems to be unmoved: Canon far out front, Sony far behind. And this before the dust settles with regards to the new RP.

Sony admits they will sell less cameras this year, and seems to have slowed their pace of new releases. Give it a few years and even in FF MILC, we will see Canon #1. And it's not about change vs the status quo; that argument is to be made with regards to smartphones vs traditional cameras. Sony is not that revolutionary.

@Thoughts R Us - LOL, wow, what hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance you are exhibiting! Consider your prior diatribes. For example, in this previous diatribe almost every sentence has the word "Sony" in it:

"The real loser is Sony. Canon will crush Sony from here on out. And Sony gets no more converts from Canon or Nikon. Maybe a few switching back. To new users, they will no longer see Sony as the only game in town if you want smaller high quality FF mirrorless. They will see the names of the giants and many will choose them over Sony.

Nikon will outsell Sony. I can guarantee you that Canon will outsell Sony by a very wide margin. Sony will be consigned to small share of the FF mirrorless market; they've had 100% with no competition. Now they will are going to get besieged by all sides. Even Panasonic will swoop in and take away the video shooters from Sony."

I'm not cherry picking anything. Two major camera sellers (the two biggest in the United States) are well Sony's offerings are selling. The sales rankings are the sales rankings. They are what they are. You want other data? After Canon and Nikon released their FF MILCs in Japan, the combined forces of Canon and Nikon only garnered 33% of FF MILC sales (that's for Canon and Nikon combined, not each), while Sony still walked away with 67% of sales (all by themselves). Again, the data is the data. Canon and Nikon combined should have easily grabbed 67% of sales, leaving Sony with only 33% of sales. But that didn't happen. The data is the data. You can't bury your head in the sand forever. Or can you? LOL.

Keep in mind, a lot of Nikonians said the same thing against Canon. But Canon outplayed Nikon in the market, and they've basically been ahead of Nikon in SLR/DSLR market position ever since. Likewise, I think Sony is outplaying Canon and Nikon in the mirrorless era. For one thing, Sony's investments in sensor domination is paying off. Secondly, getting a head start on Canon and Nikon in mirrorless is paying off. Thirdly, Sony courting 3rd party lens manufacturers into developing for the E-mount system is paying off. And I don't know why you say that Sony "seems to have slowed their pace of new releases." Based on what? At Photokina, Sony announced that they will be releasing 12 new E-mount lenses in 2019.https://www.techradar.com/news/sony-to-launch-12-more-lenses-in-2019That's your idea of slowing down the pace of releases?!?

@T3: Sony has slowed down the pace of new camera body releases. Your data point for FF MILC sales is old and before the RP release; I realize it's the last data point out there but it's still obsolete. And even that showed Sony dropping from 100% to about 66% in a few months. Not many companies would be glad about losing a third of their market share in a few months.

BTW, thanks again for bothering to search the archives of my past comments. I must be really important to you. I notice you seem to treat a discussion like some sort of college debate club...it's an interesting technique. I also note that periodically you get upset and your tone changes to hostile with some personal insults, like "fan-boy drivel" and "what hypocrisy"...it seems I may strike a nerve.

But we can go back and forth and you won't change my mind and I won't change yours, and we will not change any one else's mind either.

"And even that showed Sony dropping from 100% to about 66% in a few months. Not many companies would be glad about losing a third of their market share in a few months."

Firstly, any time ANY competitor enters the market, your percent market share will ALWAYS drop from 100%. But Canon only captured 22.1% and Nikon only 10.4% of the market, while Sony had a whopping 67%. That's 3x more than Canon and 6.7x more than Nikon. Is that really what you are celebrating? Furthermore, these numbers are from Japan, where Nikon and Canon have historically been FAR more popular than Sony. If there's any place where Canon and Nikon (combined) should have gotten 67% of FF MILC sales, leaving only 33% to Sony, it would have been in Japan.

Anyways, let's wait and see what the latest numbers show. I'm pretty sure you aren't going to be too happy about those numbers either. Interest in the Nikon Z6/Z7 and EOS R bodies seem to have fallen off precipitously since they were initially introduced.

@T3: you write "Firstly, any time ANY competitor enters the market, your percent market share will ALWAYS drop from 100%." That's my point. They've already peaked. They will never have it better than zero competition.

As to your assumptions about sales of the Canon and Nikon cameras...you don't know...you are as clueless as the rest of us. And please don't bring up Amazon again...it's just embarrassing for you. We do know that the RP seems to be selling well, and there are reports that both the R and RP have gotten off to a strong start.

And of course there is the overall camera market where Canon leads by a country mile.

BTW T3 there is no way that Sony will ever overtake Canon for #1 in overall camera sales in such a shrinking market. There are not enough new entrants to the market, and there will never be such a mass migration from Canon to Sony. And Sony now has no market to themselves like they used to, which is where Sony usually thrives. To Sony's credit they do like to try new ideas and sometimes create new markets, so they start out strong, but when faced with competition, they usually fade.

Sony started out with APS-C mirrorless, pretty much the only one, and now they have competition, so they haven't done much until the new A6400. They had FF MILC all to themselves, but now they don't, and so expect to see a slowdown in release of new bodies.

It's still a fact that Canon's market share in interchangeable lens cameras (DSLR and MILC, and all sensor formats taken together) has increased in the last few years, to about 45-50%, while Nikon's share has decreased to about 25%, so if there's any mass exodus going on, it's from Nikon, not Canon.

You make some good points. But there is one big thing you are ignoring, and that is, that Canon is struggling with 4K video which is important to many consumers. Video used to be their strength which gave them a lot of new customers and it is the one area where Canon is now lagging behind.

The 1.7 crop factor is a major limitation that video bloggers and many consumers would notice. The fact that the new Canon mirrorless cameras lack IBIS (In-body, Image Stabilization) is a big problem for Canon's marketing department.

Now with regards to lenses, most consumers buying DSLR cameras including Canon's do not own more than 1 or 2 lenses. They are not going to be as loyal to the brand as you suggest. So let us not take consumer sentiments for granted :-) The people who are less likely to switch are the professionals many of whom own 8 or more lenses; that, I agree with you.

So the fact that Canon's major competitors are ahead in 4K video and are leaders in video autofocus is a big deal.

It is difficult to gauge likely sale trajectories on generalised assumptions about what matters to customers or how many lenses they own.I move in a wide circle of people who don’t care about 4k so It would never occur to me that most customers value this. The main reason I don’t use it is because 1080p gives me what I need, 4 k is resource hungry and has no added value for my purposes. As for lenses, it’s hard to gauge what is an average ownership , maybe two but on the other hand this site tends to attract to enthusiasts, many with more than one system judging by gear lists. I for example am an enthusiast who earns small amounts, I have 7 L lenses in my inventory. It makes sense to stick with canon for me. Every thing works , the quality is comercially robust, the kit reliable, servicing is quick and the cameras are a joy to use handling wise. Perhaps it’s the latter, the experience that keeps me in the canon eco system.

Affordable in the USA, not in Europe .I also think canon has a strange policy : they offer a low end body but at the same time they develop heavy and expensive high end lenses . The 24-105 is an exception but nevertheless, this lens is not cheap....

It is no wonder some people think you are a paid troll when you repeat the same things over and over again, even after they have been disproved to you.

All companies welcome competition because it GROWS the market. It is only when the market has reached maturity and is no longer growing that it is advantageous to be the largest or only player.

The mirrorless market is in the earliest growth stage.

Sony has NEVER had the whole market to themselves. Their FF milcs compete with Canon and Nikon DSLRs. DPR doesn't make any distinction between the two formats and neither do buyers. People choose an A7rIII or a Nikon D850 for example.

Your claim that Sony has made no inroads is the most preposterous of all. Canon and Nikon have just CHANGED THEIR MOUNTS because of Sony. At huge expense and at the cost of great uncertainty.

Sony sold the most FF cameras for the first time last year, worldwide. That is BOTH DSLR and milc. They are the current market leader in FF sales.

What's Canon's point? Why do they need to keep reinventing what a good number for a sensor's resolution is? Why not pick a number and stick with it. It looks like they create a sensor with a slightly different number of MP just for the point of being it different, to pretend that they selected a new magic number every time that perfectly positions the camera and perfectly balances aspects related to sensor resolution.

(Here, you have it, I explained the joke for you. So why am I making fun of Canon? Because they deserve it.)

The problem with your assumption is that it assumes everyone looking to buy a camera isn't already invested in one system or the other. Yes the D750 is great. But if someone already owns a Canon DSLR then you probably are not considering that option.

yeah, the D750 is heavier/bigger, but it's not much different to my D7200, and to be honest it's the lense weight/size that is largely the determining factor in everything.

Yes, I agree about investment in lens systems, but given that both canon and nikon have launched a new mount, I would consider changing if sensor and system were better. Nikon do make some lovely lenses but at stupid prices (70-200mm F/2.8 for example) Canon's equivalent is a better compromise for non-professionals, so if the "new" lenses also were better value (and sensor/auto focus also better/equal) I for one would consider changing (as once I changed from Canon due to (IMO..) lame EOS series upgrades/sensor).

I'm Canon shooter (4 cameras 15 lenses), but I don't use Windows or Apple. Canon made new complicated CR3 format without disclosing specification. So I will not buy R system until there will be good support for CR3 for open software.

Not sure if you can run a whole canon application in wine. I doubt it.But I admit it is a bit of a faff. If you can get a cheap windows licence you can run it on virtual box in linux. Again a bit of a faff!

One should be insane to order this camera over Sony, Nikon, Panasonic and Fuji offerings at any price. It is worse than them all, combined. Perhaps it is good for Canon users, who have loads of Canon lenses. For the rest of humanity, just choose anything from companies above, and chances are you get more modern technology at even better prices.

I'd take this camera over the APSC Fuji every time. Odd ball format they stuck with will hurt them in the long run. It's not 2010 and all the big players have stepped up and said FF is the standard and with the prices dropping like this camera, there is no reason APSC will survive long term.

@Stonejack; no one has to be insane to want the RP over anything else. The RP body is less expensive than an XT-3, D500, 7DmkII, D7500, and not much more than an A6500, yet it has better IQ than any of those APS-C cameras, and is lighter than some too. While the A7III, Z6, S1 seem to have just a little bit better IQ at very high ISOs, it's not enough to make up for the cost savings of the RP. Even at ISO3200 you cane easily make very large high quality 16"x20" prints - that's plenty for most, especially for anyone buying this camera. For $2200 I can have a great little FF camera and an outstanding zoom lens (RF24-105/4) both of which together are capable of taking amazing photos. Or... I could get the Sony, and have a body with a slower, shorter focal length, poor-to-mediocre image quality lens attached, or I could get the Nikon and no lens, or I could get nothing at all from Panasonic. hmm.$2200 is my budget, I'll be getting the Canon RP.

With Canon being the highest seller of interchangeable cameras globally. This to me indicates (and I am in agreement) that a camera is more than the sum of its parts or spec sheet. Whatever the reason, consumers and professionals alike are choosing Canon over other brands and have been doing so for quiet some time. You cannot simply dominate like this through marketing alone, you need to back that up with quality products. . Canon would not be in the postion it is today unless it provided its customers with quality and reliable products that perform as intended and produce quality results, and are proven to consistently do so time and time again. Canon’s providence in the market place is not a mistake or due to 50% of photographers being “insane”

Not everybody is a camera nerd like we are! Many people want to buy a camera brand they can trust, with an established reputation in the photographic industry, that's affordable for them and gives good pictures. It's not hard to understand.

Canon delivers cameras with appeal to the real world consumers. They've always been very good at that.

The EOS RP isn't exactly topping the list. It's false to assume that past performance is a guarantee of future results, especially when you're talking about a different product in a different product category. Maybe Canon would have done better if they had branded the "RP" as an EOS "Rebel R" because the Rebel name is still quite successful in the DSLR category. But "RP" doesn't appear to have the same draw among consumers. The RP is currently at #86 among MILCs on Amazon.

@T3: Amazon is great but when it comes to FF ILC's I don't think of them as anything definitive. And their classification system sometimes gets screwed up. I remember one time they had a high end ILC classified as a "point and shoot."

If you're into large camera retailers, B&H has the RP listed as "#1 Seller." I think more people buy higher end cameras from B&H than Amazon. And let's face it, any FF camera above $1000 is a high end camera for most consumers.

@Thoughts R Us - I don't think B&H's sales volume can compare to Amazon's. But even if you were to pin all your hopes on B&H's list, it still doesn't paint the best picture for Canon because it shows the EOS R down at #9, behind three A7III listings. Here's the top 10 best sellers at B&H (assuming that their order of appearance actually indicates their ranking):

#1. EOS RP body#2. A7III bundle#3. A6400 body#4. A6400 kit #5. A7III bundle#6. A6400 kit#7. Panasonic GX85#8. A7III body#9. EOS R bundle#10. EOS RP kithttps://ibb.co/m55GyhWIf we generously assumed that each of these positions was equal (for example, 100 units each), that would mean that the EOS R is being outsold 3:1 by the A7III. (But obviously, each position is not equal, so the real ratio is worse for Canon.) I wonder if the EOS RP is even cannibalizing EOS R sales, which is why the EOS R is so far down the list. That wouldn't be good because that would rob Canon of the EOS R's higher purchase price.

It is utterly unclear to me what the purpose is of debates over the relative rankings of various cameras on B&H. Sony will outsell Canon overall in mirrorless; this will be true for a few years yet, no matter what Canon does. Canon's intention is to prevent the migration to Sony of its DSLR users and offer a mirrorless simple to use alternative for those looking for full frame without a lot of complexity. We can brag about 14 stop DR or f/2 lenses, but very few people outside this forum (or even inside this forum) will ever use those feature.

The RP is a good camera for its intended market, and the sales numbers are good. So are Sony's. It is a good thing for both companies if their cameras do well. With Nikon's drop, it is not a good thing for us to have either Canon or Sony monopolize the market. Complaining about Canon not innovating? Watch what will happen if Canon disappears. No company innovates unless they have to and then only as much as they need to.

I don't think B&H is a reliable source of data about camera popularity. They tend to get lots of walk-ins and in-person sales and they always push Canon. This proposition of a 1300 FF camera sounds very appealing to customers and that probably skews the sales figures. Amazon has no such bias and therefore is much more reliable IMO:

Thoughts you said that for the R 3 months ago. See what happened. You’ve got to be lucky if you see it btw spot 40 and 50 of the BCN or Amazon rankings. Let’s hope this new forecast of yours will see a different fate.

Canon RP is a Rebel version of Full Frame, ticks a few boxes, but leaves out a lot of features. However a skilled photographer could still get a lot of good image quality out of it. And it is lite for travel. Low cost is one of its best features. Give Nikon another year to bring out a stripped down Z body for prosumers or consumers, vacationers, or maybe less than a year. Sony, I don't know. Sony selling well for FF.

People will buy the RP if they feel that the IQ they gain from FF and the RF lenses is worth the loss of features over a similarly priced APS-C body. Right now I'd say it looks good for Canon users as the 80d/7d lines are outdated and not very attractive, and the M line is fully incompatible.

I don't see people not tied to Canon switching over for this body because the APS-C offers from Fuji and Sony are extremely strong in this price range. Plus, in the case of Sony, there is APS-C to FF compatibility.

Second, I don't believe I ever compared the R to the M50. I predicted and still do predict success for the R system.

Third, I do believe this RP is selling well, and that if one looks at the broader arc, Canon is establishing itself very well in FF mirrorless with both its bodies and lenses. Canon plays for the long term.

jay: I don't know if we'll ever know the full sales numbers or how it will compare overall with the Sony or any other camera. Over time we should see how market share shakes down in the mirrorless market and for cameras overall, but even then we may not get precise data.

I think the key to your analysis is that you divide the buying public into 2 camps: those who already own Canon, and those who are "not tied into Canon." I think this is the right track. What I postulate is that the market of those who already own Canon is larger than new entrants into the market. The other market of those "not tied into Canon" is those who own other brands and may switch. But I think most do not switch at all; that is a myth of camera nerds on the internet like we are. So really this camera's market is the largest addressable one there is: the universe of existing Canon owners. As long as this does well with existing Canon owners it will do well overall.

It is not necessary to be a pre Canon user already to afford this RP camera and not a minus either if your reason is cost (unless you are brand loyal). The RP camera body plus free EF adapter and Canon 24-105mm 3.5-5.6 kit lens at B&H Photo is only $1699. So relatively inexpensive to start rolling with RP kit. You could add the CAnon RF 35mm f1.8 for $449. or add the pancake lens Canon 40mm stm FF for about $180. (use with free adapter). This is relatively low investment to buy into Canon with zoom and a couple of primes.

It's listed as #1 Seller at B&H...but Canon knows how to manufacture efficiently and at scale. It's not good business when an item is sold out for a long time, because it means the manufacturer cannot scale to meet demand, and is leaving money on the table.

Canon is know for being an innovator using robotic automation in factories, and in general operates logistically above other camera brands.

Right now the RP is behind the A73 as far as I can see ( the much touted, ooolllldddd, A72 is nowhere). Good news for Nikon is that D850 appears above both in an overall list; bad news for Nikon is that the Z6 and 7 seem quite a bit further down.....

But irrespective of rankings that may fluctuate, it is selling well. That was one of my points. My other point, relative to the original comment in this thread, is that it is not good when a product is out of stock for a long time, because that means the company is not maximizing its financial returns from the product due to not being able to scale production properly to meet demand. Canon is the best camera manufacturer I know of that can manufacture to scale and deliver product to market. That's smart business.

If you go to the B&H website and just look for particular products, they will show (or not, depending) a little colored flag (Gold or Silver) with a #1 or #2, respectively, ranking and the words "Best seller" in the same color as the flag. The EOS RP, Nikon D850, Canon EOS 5D Mk IV, some Fuji models (X-T3, for sure), and several Sony's with these flags...

The RP may very well be the top seller. But the EOS R definitely is not. If we were to assume that each one of these rank positions were equal (ie, 100 units each), that would mean that the A7III is outselling the EOS R 3:1 since there are three A7III on this list, compared to one EOS R. But given that the three A7III's are listed above the EOS R, the ratio is probably greater than 3:1 since the A7III's higher rankings would denote a higher number of units sold.

Regardless, there are a lot of Sonys being sold compared to Canons. The RP may be #1, but Sony has positions #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6. And A7III is far outselling EOS R.

"While other manufacturers are moving ever further up-market with more expensive and capable devices, the EOS RP stands alone in providing more novice or budget-constrained users with access to the shallower depth-of-field that full frame cameras offer over those with APS-C or smaller sensors."

That is a false statement. Sony clearly planned that models would drop in price after recovering development cost and tweaking chip fab for higher yield, thus filling-out the range. 5-year-old Sony sensor designs are now dirt cheap for Sony to fab -- but it's the design that's from 5 years ago, not the cameras being sold as new. For that matter, this Canon's sensor is also not exactly a new design, but a simplified version of the 5DIV sensor; I see no indication Canon has brought any new fab tech up over the last few years, and their fab tech is significantly behind Sony.

"First, any time a new camera comes out no one review site can consider every other camera ever made at every price point it has been sold at. Kind of like with cars."

If you don't consider, don't make claims. DPReview keeps making false claims that this Canon is setting a new price point, but it isn't. I suspect DPReview is just echoing some Canon marketing hype without checking the facts....

"Second, those Sony retread cameras are duds. The are awful to use, very poor color quality, etc. They do not deserve consideration."

Well, nothing about them is "retread" and my A7II outperforms my 5DIV in most ways, including IQ... but that's totally irrelevant. The DPReview claim is about FF sensors, which the A7 and A7II most certainly have.

The Sony sensors are better (e.g., dynamic range is higher, although that's more true of the BSI sensors in models after the A7, and PDAF pixel masking gives better phase data for autofocus than dual pixels do) and Sony also has a vastly superior JPEG engine (especially way better noise reduction). The 5DIV's sensor could have been better if Canon hadn't botched the dual-pixel signal handling, but that's a pretty technical discussion. Don't get me wrong -- performance is close enough that personal preference can override the technical differences (especially for "usability," which is 100% personal preference) -- but Canon is definitely not technically ahead. I do give Canon credit for having much nicer-looking menus....

If you want your Canon to really shine technically, get a model that can use the open-source Magic Lantern enhancements. Since discontinuing PlayMemories camera app support, there isn't any comparable support for Sonys.

The A7II makes for a decent competitor, however, the RP's autofocus has been much better in my time comparing the two. At these price points, first time camera buyers are looking at these guys. Getting a shot in focus is way more important than dynamic range at ISO 100 for these users.

But, there is the lack of a lower price point kit with a native lens so.... first time camera buyers aren't really looking at the RP...... Canon needs a low cost RF lens kit for the RP right away.

Both of them are probably shooting the R already, and probably less concerned with what the RP gets vs the R given the massive price difference. I could be wrong, and if I am I'll apologize to those 2 guys.Oh and I don't see the RP getting Gold. Unless the prize is a touchscreen enabled FF camera released at launch under $1500. But that's not DPRs criteria - thankfully.

waldoh,you're on to something here! I agree it should get gold, hope they get this done quickly. Also I hope canon speeds up new R models. We are two down, two more sensors to recycle, the 5DS and the 1DxII. Prices? $3.2k and 4.3k, respectively. Any luck we'll be done with this charade by xmas. LOL

I have no interest in mirrorless as I prefer an OVF but still follow articles to learn where the leading digital equipment is going.

This is the first full frame mirrorless camera that to me makes sense. Its weight is very reasonable and relatively speaking, so is the price. Perhaps this is the first where we are going back to the bulk of 35mm film cameras, if so very welcome.

Unfortunately this is undermined by the few lenses for it, probably most that will follow. The 24-70mm and 24-105mm zooms are too big and heavy. Why cannot they be only slightly bigger and heavier than equivalent lenses of the film era? A focus motor need not affect that much at all. And finally, why cannot the designs avoid distortion like they used to? Software correction is a poor alternative to that, limiting you to which software is suitable.

"And finally, why cannot the designs avoid distortion like they used to?"

You're probably thinking of old prime lenses, which are well corrected for that specific focal length. But zoom lenses always had issues with distortion and whatnot. Frankly, I'm fine with software correction, if it meant smaller lenses. I think it's a fair and reasonable compromise. But unfortunately, you can't have it both ways. If you want excellent, heavily corrected, near-perfect zoom lenses, you need a lot of corrective glass in the lens formula to accomplish that. On the other hand, if lens designers forgo a lot of those corrective lenses in the optical formula in order to make smaller, lighter, more compact lenses, then people like you complain about distortion or vignetting or CA (which typically can be very effectively corrected via a sofware profile).

I agree with you. I use a 5DIV and like it. I am a little interested in mirrorless, but if they are going to pair them with large heavy lenses, it undermines the reason for smaller, lighter mirrorless body regardless of the manufacturer.

@T3 "But zoom lenses always had issues with distortion and whatnot." Yes but now, instead of keeping that to a minimum, they allow substantial aberrations whereas most used to be moderate. Also, as an expert told me, the designs are automated and that I suspect has a lot to do with it.

If you correct an aberration with glass, you risk introducing other aberrations: lens design is a series of trade-offs (it's not as simple as: more glass = better correction but higher price).

Software correction can alleviate (or at least, provide more options for addressing) some of those trade-offs. So yes, sometimes it means you can make a simpler, lighter, maybe cheaper optical design. But it also means that by under-correcting things like geometric distortion (which can be digitally corrected with minimal cost to IQ) you can then concentrate on correcting other aberrations, potentially giving a better result overall.

It means 3rd party s/w makers have to work harder to fully support a system, but should everyone be denied potentially better lenses to make their lives easier?

Try looking at it back-to-front: the SLR design arguably limits the options open to lens designers because they have to optically correct the preview, even though that may not give the best final image.

Others may not be bothered, but when I buy a very wide angle lens, I do not want to lose a few millimetres from software correction for distortion, nor be forced into which software I can use.

@ Richard Butler says "Try looking at it back-to-front: the SLR design arguably limits the options open to lens designers because they have to optically correct the preview, even though that may not give the best final image."

It is quite true that most wide angle lenses for DSLRs are complicated by the fact that they have to be inverted telephoto designs because the mirror box stops the lens being close enough for a more straightforward design. But unless I am mistaken all lenses for DSLRs make corrections for the sake of what will appear on the sensor, not in the viewfinder. In any case, both will be the same. I cannot imagine where he gets that idea from.

Look how big, heavy and complicated modern lens designs are with so much glass it is a wonder any light ever manages to pass through it. If software correction is supposed to make designs simpler, then explain this?

LOL

IMO digital photography has largely lost its way. Technology is being subverted for profit, little else.

If I live long enough, eventually we may have full frame cameras and lenses no bigger than 35mm film equipment, with or without a mirror. MFT largely started off more or less in that direction, albeit with a much smaller frame size, but look at it now with cameras like the OMD E-M1X and big and heavy lenses totally out of proportion. I think it is absurd.

Another name for 35mm was miniature. Perhaps now with much digital we should adopt the name maximature.

Correcting distortion in software is a much better option. Why add lenses to correct for distortion when the camera (or your computer) already has the hardware that can do the correction? By allowing the lens to have distortion, you can either make the lens lighter & smaller, or correct other aberrations better.

Battery consumption is among the worst of all mirrorless cameras. If you shoot a lot of photos in a day, don't consider the RP unless you're prepared to buy and carry a couple of extra batteries, or have the facility to recharge every night. But for most people, who shoot no more than 100 or so images in a day, it shouldn't be a problem.

Keep in mind that the battery ratings for mirrorless cameras severely understate their true life. This has been shown over and over with virtually every mirrorless camera. The system designed to measure that is from the DSLR days, and its assumptions are outdated for mirrorless models.

If the CIPA rating is 250 shots, you can probably safely expect 2 to 3 times that amount.

Thoughts - Battery consumption varies hugely according to how a camera is used. e.g. a travel or landscape photographer probably only turns the camera on for a couple of minutes at a time, and turns it off after taking a few shots.

A sports photographer is more likely to have the camera switched on for the entire duration of a sporting event. A wildlife photographer may have his camera turned on for much longer periods, with his finger permanently poised on the button.

With a DSLR this doesn't matter (unless in live-view) because consumption is extremely low. I leave my DSLRS switched on all day.

But with a mirrorless, if the camera is switched on, either the EVF or the rear screen will always be using current. Some photographers may get 500-600 shots out of a battery, but others will get no more than 100.

I would have bought it. I do street photography. RP's image quality is good enough for me. I own a 60D at present and I haven't switched to Sony's system either, for a few reasons (battery life and banding come to mind). I will buy the EOS R, price isn't an issue. Batteries have the obscure tendency to be dead when you need them. And having to carry more than two along is silly to me

Wait. You won’t buy Sony because of banding and Battery life? Sony has double the battery life of any of the Canon mirrorless. And there is no banding with mechanical shutter. Only with electronic shutter. And the banding in eshutter will be worse with Canon due to slower readout speed. You can buy what you want, but your logic is completely backwards..

That’s one of those things like star-eater.. it’s an extremely minor problem that most people will never ever see in their own photos, blown out of proportion by those who feel threatened by the advancement in technology.

For street photography.. the EyeAF technology can drastically simplify the mechanics of achieving focus.. but if you choose to disqualify that technology over the striping issue.. well, your loss... I’ve not seen any striping in probably more than 150,000 exposures on my A9.

I honestly congratulate Canon for trying new directions with full frame mirrorless bodies. Yes, the sensor is not new, it's not freaking fast, but not everyone needs these features. Higher DR, faster AF, Eye-AF and other features are of course useful, but not essential.

On the other hand, new RF glass is impressive, but on the expensive side.

I've upgraded to a Sony A7III from a 10 year old D70s, and considering some of the shots I've taken with the latter one, I'm sure this Canon is very capable of creating beautiful images. So, don't bash them, but wish the best. We need competition for improvement and innovation.

But, don't play chicken Canon, and add an IBIS to your mirrorless bodies. This is not acceptable, you can do better in this regard!

Agreed. Canon do really need to pull their fingers out and get a couple of affordable compact kit zooms on the market. I can't help feeling that they rushed this body out to try and stem the flow to Sony, but they should have rushed out some affordable lenses to go with it. The 35mm F1.8 macro is a great start, but how about a 24-85mm F4 budget RF ?

Canon in recent interviews have implied that IBIS is still in the development stage, so don't expect it in 2019.

Do you have inside info from Canon? Some rumors predict a high megapixel R series with IBIS by end of year. Bottom line: no one knows.

As to stopping the flow to Sony: again, an unfounded statement based on no true facts. If anything, Sony is seeing its market share drop due to new competition and has admitted they expect to sell less cameras this year.

I have been a Canon user for many years( started with 300D) . I have used many crop and full-frame cameras ( including the 5D IV ). I also owned a Sony A6000 (colors were not good). I now own a A7 Iii. Sony has cracked the color science conundrum .

I have the A7III as well and I wanted to get your opinion on the lenses. For me the images that I get with the A7III (portraits) are just too sharp and very unpleasing compared to Canon images from when I had the 6D years ago. What are your thoughts on this?

Sony A7III has the most accurate colors with Fuji's XT-3 for now. This means, combined with the DR of A7III, you can bend the colors to any profile you want.

We, humans tend to like the softer images in the photos. Maybe it's masking the impurities of us, or it's just nostalgia, but this can be well emulated starting from a simple blur to elaborate film simulations. I don't think extreme sharpness is a bad thing, since you can subtract the excess of it, but can't add detail back to the image in the post.

Yosef - If your portraits are "too sharp" there are plenty of ways to make them softer and more pleasing.

One option is to put a soft focus filter on the lens. Another is to use one of the various "soften" or "blur" tools in Photoshop, Lightroom and other editing programs.

You can also set the in-camera "creative styles" on Sony cameras, or the "Picture Styles" in Canon cameras, to lower the sharpness, and then save that setting to a function button or custom mode so you can use it when you need it.

Funny when lenses are too soft people complain they aren’t sharp enough. Then when lenses are too sharp they complain they show too much detail. (Read the comments in the 135GM Lensrentals report on DPR)

I have been a Canon user for many years( started with 300D) . I have used many crop and full-frame cameras ( including the 5D IV ). I also owned a Sony A6000 (colors were not good). I know own a A7 Iii. Sony has cracked the color science conundrum .

"Wow, every time I think the Sony inferior complex can't get any worse the fanboys manage to top themselves."

And then you woke up. If I were you I wouldn't intentionally goad Sony users - we tend to be be polite but if you want to play dirty that's easy done since your camera bodies are an actual embarrassment.

@ZeBebitoI really do not understand this "the cheapest FF" will sell by truckloads. I mean, anything is possible, but this seems to go against common sense imo. The A7II at its current price point is the living proof that this market bracket of low end FF with lacklustre performance at the price topping high end of crop sensor is not really thriving. Plausible that the RP could do better than the A7II (plausible does not implies "likely") but it is not going to be earth shuttering unless the price will be drastically reduced. It needs to be selling comparably to the A7 (not the A7II) to be really making a splash. Realistically Canon does not even have native glass for this camera.

@armandino; the A7II doesn't even have a touchscreen, something that everyone's cellphones have had for years and years. That omission alone is a dealbreaker for me regardless of anything else it's capable of doing. I suspect that is more of it's Achilles Heel than anything.

@NowHearThisMy observation is not based on a few individual preferences, but by looking at the potential market for such camera. Who is interested in spending a non-trivial sum of $1300 body only? We are basically looking at people that cannot afford to spend just a few hundreds more to get a much more capable camera such as the A7RII, A7III, Z6. So Money is a dealbreaker, then:1) Photographers a) if FF is a requirement, and you need some level of performance then get a used D700, 1DsII for a lot less. b) performance is not a concern, used 5D, 5DII, new A7, A7II. 2) Videographers: do you really need FF? I do not see a real videographer having FF as a high priority. You get so much to choose from for $1,300 and less that does so much more. I understand that the RP will appeal to some, but I am skeptical that it will sell by bucketloads, not until the price drops.... dramatically.

@Armandino I am the potential market for this camera. As an enthusiast, who is asked to do the occasional wedding the RP great. I am looking for a small & light FF camera, that doesn't cost a fortune, has great S-AF, very good C-AF, great High ISO performance, face detection, fantastic SOOC images - so I can sent or upload quickly w/o much editing, a best in class multi-purpose do most things lens (i.e. RF24-105/4). The RP does all this perfectly for the least amount of money. As for the bucketloads. B&H is still listing the RP as their #1 Best Seller. (It's been like this for a little while) I know this isn't representative of all sales, but at at least one place it's selling by bucketloads - a safe bet (and one I'd put money on) is that it's doing the same at many, many other places too.

@MikeRan. I don't know how many FF cameras has touchscreens in 2015. But I do know how many years before that Sony was putting touchscreens on their APS-C Nex series of cameras. I also know how many cameras they had with touchscreens prior to the A7II. They had the technology, they weren't removing features to hit a lower price point, to me it just seems like they didn't want to give that feature to consumers (I know, it sounds a bit tinfoil conspiracy theory like). Whether that is true to any degree or not is irrelevant, the fact is touchscreens have been in use for years, I need one and won't buy a camera without it. But that's me.

@NowHearThisOf course it is selling well now! It is a brand new product! It will be interesting to see how long it will take to saturate the market :-)"least one place it's selling by bucketloads" being #1 selling in a store for a month is not what I define "bucketloads" let's see what the trend is for one year or more and not just on B&H

@armandino I believe I made some of those same points. yes B&H is not indicative of every store, and while the camera is obviously capable of taking some stellar image, having a low price generally does help to drive a lot of sales too. What you and everyone else defines as bucketloads can be quite different. I think initial sales are important (to a degree) and relevant. Many newly released products sell well but never get the #1 seller status. Like you, I will be interested to see how the RP does over the next year in terms of sales.

@NowHearThisI agree with your point, not so much about "stellar image" out of the RP though. It outputs as bad as it gets in the FF world nowadays. Decent compared to crop not so compared to peer FF. Very close to the venerable 5DII, which was not stellar even at its time.

@Thoughts is correct. There are thousands of Canon users who bought their cameras when they needed one for their family vacation and couldn’t care less about sites like this, or switching systems everytime a new feature appears which is every month.

That massive market will find mountains of RPs at the local CostCo or Sams Club waiting for them. Distribution and brand presence always play a significant role in the marketing process.

@armandino I guess stellar is a bit subjective. There's Some who would laugh at FF &call it a compromise, and actually be correct in some instances. However, in working with a lot of sample files from Nikon, Sony, & Canon at low ISOs I can get the RP sample images to look just as good as other FF cameras in it's price - infact I can make them all pretty much look equally great. Generally what I see is "stellar" IQ very much in line with anything in the $2000 range at low ISOs, but coming in last at very high ISOs. For many people, the biggest difference they will see would be determined solely by their lens(es) they us on any given camera. I highly doubt most people could see the difference in a RP, R, S1, Z6, A7III at lower ISOs at print sizes up to 24"x36". I've tested the R (the RP will be similar) and the IQ up to ISO6400 looks very good, with ISO 12800 usable for the web.

@NowHearThisThe RP has a FF sensor, so obviously it will output an image that would be typically better than a smaller sensor, aren't you paying the extra $$ for this after all? However calling it a "stellar" IQ gives a bit away that you are biased toward Canon products. For some DR might be as relevant if not more relevant than the low light performance. It seem a bit of a contradiction to me paying more money for RP than a crop camera because you expect a better IQ and for such you compromise on the camera performance (yes the RP has the performance of 10 years ago technology), yet it offers a much worse DR at low ISO settings than the cheaper, crop sensor cameras. So, infact, you are also compromising image quality, gaining only in ISO performance. For instance I cannot see the appeal for the RP if I can get for the same money the Fuji X-T3, which offers very fast glass (besides a truly stellar performance) that negates the low light disadvantage.

1 of 2 @armandino, "aren't you paying the extra $$ for this after all?" That's the thing, with the RP you aren't. It costs less than the X-T3, and until just recently was less than the D7500 and the same price as the A6500 (all body only prices). So I'm not paying extra, I'm paying less in some instances. As for being biased toward Canon, hahahahaha. Thanks for the laugh. Few on DPR are more critical of them then me. I do like the R and RP, but I hated my T2i, and returned my 80D do to some bad AF issues that even MFA could not fix. If you checked, you'll see that my last 4 cameras have been Olympus and Sony. Brand means nothing to me. I like/hate things based on thier own merit. You mention DR, yes, this is one area where Canon will be lower than most, that still hasn't stopped photographers from taking hundreds of millions of great shots with using them. DR is not an issue for me, but if it is for you, that's fine.

2 of 2 @armandino, As far as the 10yr performance, I looked, and it seems like the D3x and A850 aren't as good in all areas. ;-) Being a landscape, street, documentary, people & travel shooter, I don't need any features found in a sports oriented camera and I appreciate not having to pay for those features I don't/won't use. I can't see the appeal of the X-T3 (especially since trying one out last week) since I can get better IQ at any ISO a lower price (body only price) and Fuji doesn't even make a main lens that appeals to me yet. The 18-55 is to limited in range (and no match for the RF24-105/4 optically, the 18-135 is not wide enough and not good enough optically, the 16-55, while great, is too short on the telephoto end and brings the cost above the RP/24-105 kit, and it weighs more too.

@NowHearThis"DR is not an issue for me, but if it is for you, that's fine". You do not need to keep explaining to me why the RP is such a great camera for you. I am just questioning your definition of "stellar". Again the sensor is far from stellar, I my take "stellar for my own needs". Fine with that, let's stop running around circles.

@armandino 4 posts ago I already said "stellar" was subjective. I've taken sample images and did a little editing Lightroom and made already great shots better - again that was with very minimal editing. I also took test shots from other cameras and edited them all (quite a bit more this time) and I could get the RP to look even better than with the minimal editing and as good as other cameras I also seriously post processed. (I've also said this before, this is that "running in circles" you talk about.) Since you take umbrage at the word stellar, I'll let you come up with the word for two steps above great.

By the DPR comment section I come to the conclusion that photographers (assuming at least a fraction of you take one or two photographs once in a while) are the only breed that have the ability to be offended by gear. Looks like a spec sheet and a few samples can have the same effect as someone calling your mother bad names.

What's with all these idiotic comments about Sony fanboys "fearing" Canon?!?I wish Canon success in catching up with Sony. If ever they manage, bravo. In the mean time, I will keep enjoying my A9 and Sony's constant desire to innovate

Sony today is like what Canon was back in the 1990s: ambitious, innovative, constant desire to innovate. That's why I switched from Nikon F to Canon EOS back in the early 1990s. I think it's the underdog's mentality. When you are on top too long, you get lazy, complacent, act like you are entitled. That's how Nikon was behaving back then, and it seems like that's how Canon is behaving now. Nikon assumed that their huge usership would stay with them no matter what, and that's how Canon seems to be behaving now. It takes the ambitious, technologically superior underdog to shake things up and to prove the status quo leader wrong. Canon did that to Nikon in the 1990s, and that's what Sony is doing to CaNikon now (since both of them are the status quo leaders today).

I bought the original EOS M with the hopes that Canon would be the technological leader in mirrorless. That clearly didn't happen, so I looked elsewhere. The same happened back in the early days of AF SLRs: I left Nikon.

The same tired analogy with Canon/NIkon in the late 80's/early 90's. Except it's not the same at all. Overall Canon has not lost market share. Sony has made no inroads with pro's. Sony had a while where it had zero competition in FF mirrorless but that time is gone and Sony has already peaked.

And Canon has once again done to Sony what it did to Nikon: came out with a more advanced and flexible lens mount.

You are clearly ignorant of history. Canon launched the EOS system in 1987. They introduced their first pro body, the EOS 1, in 1989. But it wasn't until after they launched the EOS 1N in 1994 that Canon started making significant inroads with pros. So for about 7 years, foolish people just like you kept dismissively saying "Canon has made no inroads with pros!" All those people ended up with mud on their faces.

Sony's first pro FF MILC, the A9, didn't hit the market until May 2017. Their first telephoto prime, the 400/2.8, didn't hit the market until September 2018. Their popular A7 III didn't hit the market until February 2018. Their 16-35/2.8 GM wasn't introduced until August 2017. The 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 FE weren't introduced until the year prior. All these are very recent. So to be so dismissive of Sony at this early stage is as foolish as dismissing Canon in the early 90's! Foolish fools then, foolish fools now.

@Gixxer SW🙂I just wanted to be clear and fair at the same time. Don't sell a cheap car while it would cost me a lot of fuel in the future. They followed the same policy of selling copiers .selling cheap copier and expensive ink.

So with RP are you going to have to buy more SD cards pr waste more electricity? What do you mean actually? Rp is several hundred Dollars less than the closest rival and it comes with free adapter (since day one).Several hundred Dollars. Several hundred. Several...

I wonder how many people are Brand loyal and struggle to buy canonyeah Canon was so good in the 2000's but not now, use the best at the timedon't be a fool, these are just Camera companies that want your moneythat's it

Agree it’s foolish to change every time but now is the perfect time to change if you want. Consider that if you go RP or R you’ll eventually be going to the native mount otherwise there’s no major advantage to switching at this time. If that’s the case then you might as well consider other brands too. If the R or RP were knockout bodies (which they aren’t - and I’ve tried both) then the reason to switch would be considerably less so. I’ve been a Canon guy since I started 20+ years ago. I’m due for a body upgrade and am considering other options given the current state of things.

With the exception of some diehard fan boys, I don't think people really are as "brand loyal" as it seems, especially when you back away and look at the broader historical context. For example, Nikon was king for a long time. They were definitely king among pros. Then Canon came along with their EOS system, kept chipping away at the market with great products, and eventually Canon became king. And there were many Nikon users who were extremely loyal to Nikon. But Canon still overtook Nikon to become king. Now we have Sony coming along, chipping away at the market with great products. Things don't stay the same forever. Things change all the time. Plus, these days its easier to change systems than ever thanks to smart adapters. I'm a Canon DSLR user who has kept many of my Canon lenses and who uses them on my Sony bodies via a Sigma MC-11 adapter with no problems. As time goes by, I'll replace my EF lenses, but I can do it gradually. I'm enjoy this flexibility.

@T3: your analogy with the Canon/NIkon competition from 3 decades ago doesn't hold up. We see no appreciable loss of market share by Canon, in spite of whatever cherry-picked spin Sony may put on it. Sony has not been chipping away at Canon; perhaps other brands, but not Canon.

Just this week there was a report from Sony of Germany that they expect to sell less cameras this year. Why? Increased competition and a declining market.

No matter what Sony will do, they will never have it as good as they did when they had no competition in the FF MILC market. That time is over; they have peaked.

Ironically, if anything, Canon has done to Sony what they did to Nikon the late 80's/early 90's. They've come out with a new lens mount that is more advanced electronically than Sony's, and one that because of physical dimensions allows great flexibility in lens design. So Sony is actually playing the part of Nikon in your analogy.

@Thoughts R Us - Canon launched their EOS system in 1987. They launched their first EOS pro body, the EOS 1 in 1989. The EOS system really didn't start gaining significant traction amongst pros until Canon introduced the EOS 1N in 1994. After that, the EOS system *really* took off. So it was a good 5-6 years before the EOS system really took off against Nikon.

Sony just released their pro body in 2017. They just released their popular A7III February of last year! So the time scale that you are looking at is still extremely early. You are astoundingly foolish to be so dismissive so early. Plus, you have to take a look at how Canon and Nikon's FF MILCs are doing against Sonys. Even after the introduction of CaNikon FF MILCs, even after the *combined* forces of CaNikon entering the market, Sony FF MILC still walked away with 67% of FF MILC sales in Japan, while CaNikon *combined* only mustered 33%.

@Thoughts R Us - You are just a man in complete denial. As Mark Twain said, "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." That's basically what we are seeing today. Sony is basically copying what Canon did back in the 1990s: technological superiority, fast pace of development, massive marketing, lots of good press, etc.

@t3, from what I've been reading over the last few week, is that Canon m series is what is killing sony's sale, and sure Canon is king for pros, from there service departments all over the world, with the best turn around on repairs and service, and about 90% of all the winning photography contest were Canon

@tripodcat - The EOS M system is extremely popular in Japan. In other markets, not as much. For example, take a look at Amazon's Best Sellers in Mirrorless:https://ibb.co/b5qzHs1#1. Sony A7III body#2. Sony A6400 kit#3. Sony A6400 body#4. Canon EOS M50 kit#5. Sony A6000 kit#6. Panasonic G7 bundle#7. Panasonic GX85 kit#8. Sony A6000 bundle#9. Panasonic G7 kit#10. Sony A5100 kit#11. Sony A7RIII body#12. Sony A7II kit#13. Sony A6300...you get the picture. EOS M is definitely not "killing" Sony. The top 3 best selling mirrorless cameras on Amazon are Sonys. 6 of the top 10 best selling mirrorless cameras on Amazon are Sonys. Only one camera in the top ten is Canon.

The other issue with EOS M usership is that it's an isolated pool, with no cross-compatibility with the RF system. If any of these EOS M users ever want to move up to FF, they have no upgrade path. It doesn't matter how cheap an EOS RP gets, EF-M and RF are totally different systems.

@Kandid - When Canon launched the EOS R, it was up in the top 10 of mirrorless sales on Amazon. At this moment it's at #63. The EOS RP is hardly doing any better. It's at #68. The A7III remains at #1. The A7III has consistently remained in the top 5 ever since it was introduced. So your "won't be for loooonngggg..." comment was apparently meant for Canon, not Sony!

The EOS R and RP have basically been duds in the market, especially when you consider how huge Canon's user pool is. The R and RP really should be #1 and #2 on Amazon. But that is *clearly* not the case. Far from it. In fact, the R and RP have never hit #1 on Amazon. That position has consistently been owned by Sony. It just goes to show that the market has definitely changed. The status quo is definitely changing in the mirrorless era, just as it did in the AF SLR era.

@T3 Amazon rankings are meaningless - the cameras often jump a dozen places when they update them on the hour, meaning that they are working with fairly small numbers. In addition they are probably cumulative and favor the items that have been on the market longer.

@Suave - You only think they are "meaningless" because you don't like the results. And no, they are not "cumulative and favor the items that have been on the market longer." The A6400 is the 2nd best selling mirrorless camera on Amazon right now. It just hit the market in February!

When the EOS R was first introduced, it was in the top 10. Now it is far lower in the sales rankings. (At this moment, it's #46.) How can that be possible if the rankings are based on cumulative numbers and that they favor items that have been on the market longer? LOL.

@entoman - Yes, Amazon sales rankings tell us what are *currently* the best sellers. And yes, some cameras sell well because they are brand new and therefore are attracting attention. But keep in mind that the A7III has consistently been in the top 5 ever since it was introduced, and it's at #1 right now. Here's a screen shot with time stamp in the corner:https://ibb.co/FnbXrDNAnd in case you didn't know, the A7III was introduced February 2018, more than a year ago. And yet it's still the top selling mirrorless camera.

Now that we've established that Amazon sales rankings show what are *currently* the best sellers, let's look at where the Canon FF MILCs are. The EOS R is at #55:https://ibb.co/0nvM7qj

As for the EOS RP, it has for the time being fallen out of the top 100, so I can't screenshot its ranking position. Needless to say, it's not doing so well compared to other mirrorless bodies.

Time to face reality, guys. Canon's heyday was in SLRs/DSLRs. Mirrorless is a new game.

@Kandid - I think guys like you have been ignoring the data for quite a while now. Do you not believe BCN's numbers? BCN reported that even after Canon and Nikon released their FF MILCs, the *combined* forces of Canon and Nikon were only able to capture 33% of FF MILC sales (Canon and Nikon *combined*), while 67% of FF MILC sales still went to Sony (all by themselves).

Feel free to give us a link to the B&H sales rankings. As far as I can tell, B&H doesn't rank by number. They just group all best sellers together with no numbering. This is what I get:https://ibb.co/TK0hPqV

As you can see, after you look past their "featured" cameras, the order of appearance on this list is (sorted by "best sellers"):#1. A7III kit#2. A7III kit#3. EOS RP kit#4, A6400 kit#5. A6400 body#6. A6400 kit#7. Panasonic GX85 kit#8. A7III bodyThis list is still comprised of 6 Sony bodies vs only 1 Canon body, with the A7III still on top. So basically, it's the same "story" as what we see on Amazon.

T3 - "Time to face reality, guys. Canon's heyday was in SLRs/DSLRs. Mirrorless is a new game."

That comes across as an anti-Canon troll. Rather odd from someone who in another thread said he welcomed competition!

At the moment, Sony has a clear lead in terms of specification and image quality over Canon mirrorless, and is marginally ahead of Nikon. Sony is the only FF brand with a complete set of true native lenses.

But both Nikon and Canon have wider mounts, which will ultimately allow them to produce more ambitious lenses than Sony can (although currently Sony are matching or beating both Nikon and Canon, whose lenses are mostly legacy DSLR glass).

Right at this very second, if I was buying a mirrorless FF, I'd choose Sony, but thinking 2 or 3 years into the future, when Canon, Nikon and Panasonic have full ranges of modern mirrorless glass, Sony will find the competition extremely stiff.

At the end of the day it all depends on whether someone is desperate to switch systems now, or whether they are happy enough with their current cameras to be prepared to wait for a year or two before making up their minds.

@Termie You know Joe - fantastic - he thinks your a bit of a twerp 😊Your post above the Joe drivel is classic trolling (if you don’t mind me pointing that out.)1. BHP is hardly Joe’s fine emporium 2. What happened to all your tooting about the A72? Happy to concede the A73 is a better cam - but it’s many many $$$ more...3. You stopped at 8 - is that because 9 and 10 were Canons Termie? Naughty naughty.......

LOL, no, it's not "anti-Canon." It's just stating reality. Mirrorless is, indeed, an entirely new game. I think many people *assumed* that Canon would just start up in mirrorless where they left off in DSLRs...at the top of the market. But mirrorless is a different product category, selling to a new generation of buyers, going up against a strong competitor that has a huge head start. These are just statements of reality.

Companies rise and fall. Back in the early 90's, few people could fathom that Canon would ever overtake Nikon. Not in a million years. But I remember saying back then (as a Nikon user) that Nikon was falling behind, and Canon had the stamina, speed, and agility of a young, fresh, ambitious jock going against a middle-aged, out-of-shape former athlete (Nikon). That's how I see things now, except that Sony is in Canon's position (in the 90's), and Canon has fallen into the position that Nikon was in.

T3 - I think you're completely wrong if you believe that "many people *assumed* that Canon would just start up in mirrorless where they left off in DSLRs...at the top of the market".

If you were to visit sites such as Canon News or Canon Rumors, you'd see that even the most fanatical diehard Canon extremists have agreed all along that Canon is starting from the back in mirrorless and that it would take at least a couple of years before they could match Sony specifications or performance.

You must also surely be aware that Canon is the most conservative of all camera makers. In fact in a recent interview a Canon exec underlined that point, noting that Canon "are always the last to innovate, but are very good at catching up and becoming the leader again" (that isn't an exact quote as I forgot where I read it, but it captures the gist of what he said).

@entoman - "As a Canon user I'm probably a little biased, although I try to remain neutral and realistic."

You forget that a huge chunk of Sony users (I would actually guess that it is the *majority* of Sony users) are former Canon and Nikon users. Do you think that Sony users were born Sony users? LOL. The system hasn't even been around that long. Canon and Nikon DSLR systems have been around a LOT longer, decades longer. And given that fact, it's easy to understand why most Sony users are former Canon and Nikon users. I'm a former Canon user myself. But obviously, many of us former Canon and Nikon users who are now using Sony were not married to the brands we previously used. And before switching to Canon, I was a Nikon user. I started with Nikon manual film SLRs (Nikon FG, Nikon FE bodies).

Life's too short to silo yourself in a brand just for the sake of "loyalty" to a company that just wants you for your money.

I've nothing against Sony, but there are many reasons, other than misplaced "loyalty" why I and other Canon users are reluctant to change.

Cost is a huge factor for many - its not just a case of buying a Sony body. Flashguns can be very expensive, and adaptors. Many Canon lenses will not be fully compatible with all Sony AF modes, or will focus more slowly and less reliably on Sony simply because they weren't designed for mirrorless AF systems. So there is the cost of transitioning to another lens system.

Sony ergonomics are also a big issue - particularly for people who hand-hold with long or heavy lenses. I know, because I've hired a7Riii and used my Canon glass on it.

But I'll end her and wish you goodnight, as it's 1:30am here, and time for bed!

@T3 If you think that I need daily confirmations of my gear choices and seek them in sales numbers and such - have I got news for you! Bottom line is Amazon rankings are meaningless, they are not absolute numbers, no one knows how they are derived or what they really mean.

@Suave - "Bottom line is Amazon rankings are meaningless, they are not absolute numbers"

Even without "absolute numbers", we can still get an idea of how well camera brands are selling relative to one another. For example, here are all the FF MILC in the top 50 of Amazon's Best Sellers in Mirrorless list currently:#1. A7III#11. A7III#17. A7RIII#19. A7II#22. A7RIII#35. A7SII#36. Z6#41. A7III#42. A7#48. EOS R#49. A7III

Let's say that each position represented the EXACT SAME number of units sold (for example, 100 units). That means Sony sold 900 units vs Canon's 100 units (or a ratio of 9:1). But obviously every position is NOT equal, so the ratio would actually be far greater since position #1 means a lot more units sold than position #48. But let's be charitable and say that each position is equal, and Sony is *only* outselling Canon by 9:1. So even without "absolute numbers", it's still informative.

@termieJust wasting everybody’s time.... - first its A72 is best and winning ( Amazon) then we see the A72 at 19 at BHP so then it’s the A73 that is the saviour of mankind....It’s all nonsense! Ranting about suspect numbers ( they can’t both be correct - so best to assume both are suspect) to prove that you are clever (nothing about being able to take decent photos) is the mark of a gear obsessed troll. QED.

fool? canon lenses? are you mad? you are buying a new system if you buy eos R or RP, after a while you will sell the EF lenses and buy RF lenses, i did not say change every time :) but after the huge gap that it happened in last years between Canon and other manufacturersand Now that they want to go in a new RF systemyes it's logic to choose the optioni pray for you to understand my comment :))

only a fool would say pros use Canon so canon is the bestthey use canon because they have canon lenese and accessories,which type of pro user in photography or videography will be happy with eos R or RP? mirrorless is the future of photography but it's not enough for saving the Camera manufacturers, they will biuld Smart cameras with AI and android for compete against the smartphones

@GixxerSo true - but do not worry about the gear head saddos active here - they will move on to the next gadget once DXO or someone here (guess who) says it has a few more electrons per second moving across its sensor 🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂

RubberDials - Why do I think Canon will exceed Sony sales in 2-3 years time?

Because by then, I think Canon will have almost caught up in terms of specification and performance - the difference will be marginal.

And at that stage, given that choice, I think most people would be swayed towards Canon, due to the brand name, the better ergonomics, the styling, the glass and the fact that they'll know that more pros shoot Canon than any other brand.

Gixxer - As a Canon user for 8 years, I think the people who moved away to Sony since the introduction of the a7s, a7Riii, a7iii and a9 probably made a good move, because *right now* Sony cameras are in *most* respects better.

But with the introduction of the RF mount and promised lenses, things will change, and many will regret not having waited things out a little longer.

Canon were last (excluding poor old Pentax) to join the mirrorless revolution, so understandably it will take them a while to catch up with Sony. But they *will* catch up within a couple of years (although they may not overtake).

Kandid - "Ranting about suspect numbers ( they can’t both be correct - so best to assume both are suspect) to prove that you are clever (nothing about being able to take decent photos) is the mark of a gear obsessed troll."

You guys all forget that back in the late 1980s/early 1990s, no one could fathom that Canon EOS would ever overtake Nikon F, which was king amongst pros. Many people said that pros would never switch to Canon, especially considering that Canon had abanded their FD users and couldn't be trusted. And yet, by the late 1990s, Canon had overtaken Nikon. And today, we take it for granted that Canon is on top. But it wasn't always like that. Like I said, people couldn't fathom that it would ever happen. People laughed at the idea that any pros would ever leave Nikon for Canon. Clearly, these people ended up with mud on their faces. And now, the same kind of blind fans are saying the same kind of thing again, but this time with Sony. Foolish fools then, foolish fools now. People are clearly underestimating what a formidable, ambitious giant Sony is, just like people underestimated what a formidable ambitious giant Canon was back in the 1980s/1990s.

@t3 ya Canon and Nikon are camera companies, from my experience with Sony over the last 50 years from buying their electronics is that Sony sucks, so given that I will always think that, still waiting for them to make fridge

@termieThis is your other hilarious meme - Canon did for Nikon once (Nikon still fine as far as I can see) therefore Sony will beat Canon to death now. Surely even you can see that this is illogical (Captain) and not connected? It may be the case that Sony gets to number one (from wwwaaaaayyyy back) but whether they do or not is entirely disconnected from what happened in the 1990s.......American Airlines put TWA out of business in the 90s therefore Delta will put AA out of business tomorrow - bonkers! ( might happen but not connected)

@tripodcat - Your comments are no different from Nikonians disparaging Canon as "the copier company" back in the 1980s/1990s. And back then, Nikonians said, "Canon sucks because they abandoned all their FD system users and they'll probably do the same to their EF system users eventually." Blah, blah, blah. We've been through this before. I lived through that era. Back then, we were on photo.net, which was founded in 1993 as an online photo/camera discussion forum. These same kinds of disparaging, dismissive comments were thrown at the Canon EOS system as it was establishing itself and steadily gaining ground in the market place. Many of you are probably too young to have experienced this, and assume that Canon EOS was always on top. No, that definitely was not the case. People forget that EOS went through the same rise (and constant attacks) as Sony is now.

"Because by then, I think Canon will have almost caught up in terms of specification and performance - the difference will be marginal."

Sensor technology would have to plateau for many years for Canon to catch Sony. They don't even have a BSI sensor currently and there is even speculation some of the ADC conversion is still done off-chip.

"And at that stage, given that choice, I think most people would be swayed towards Canon, due to the brand name, the better ergonomics, the styling, the glass and the fact that they'll know that more pros shoot Canon than any other brand."

I wouldn't naturally attach you to that last statement. You may enjoy Canon styling but many don't. Canon glass offers less than Sony currently - there are hundreds of native e-mount lenses. Again, for Canon to catch up, Sony and 3rd party manufacturers would have to stop making lenses.

Canon doesn't have better ergonomics - tired of hearing that. Ergonomics is does not mean 'feels great in my hand', it is the study of design efficiency in human operated systems and tools. Sony is incredibly strong here - far more so than Canon.

If we take the A7III for example and compare it to the R, the Sony has three input dials compared to the R's two. The Sony has 4 dedicated custom buttons, the Canon has none. The Sony has a joystick, the Canon has none. The Sony has a dedicated mode dial, Canon none, The Sony has a dedicated exp. comp. dial (primary control in milc workflow), the Canon has none. The Sony has a grip with duplicate controls for vertical shooting, the Canon has none. The Canon body requires two hands just to turn on. The Sony can be turned on using one hand - the hand that lifts the camera from the bag as the switch is around the shutter button, maximising speed efficiency.

The Sony has many dedicated controls that have a low discoverability threshold, the Canon uses more modal combinations utilising a screen. It is impossible to change any parameters of the camera without turning it on. Many controls can be set on the Sony without power. On the Sony, pulling out the rear screen deactivates the eyepiece sensor, essential for operating the camera away from the eye, where your body can trigger the eyepiece sensor and shut off the rear screen - frustrating as well as causing you to lose your subject and/or miss a shot. This is something Sony once suffered from, but corrected on later models - and it's a sign that neither Nikon nor Canon really put much effort into looking at how Sony has incrementally improved their products as they have made this exact mistake with their milcs.

These are just some examples of where the Sony cameras are ergonomically successful and more refined than other manufacturers' offerings. You may like a larger body than Sony provides but that is only one aspect of design efficiency.

RubberDials - In the search for image quality, there is a point at which sharpness, resolution, dynamic range and high ISO noise all reach such a high standard that they become "good enough" for anyone but a specification obsessive.

If I could have a camera with 50MP, dynamic range of 14 stops, a DXO "low light sports" rating of over 3000, and a burst speed of 7-8fps I'll be more than happy. I think Canon will deliver that in 2020, and I'd rather wait until then than get a camera from Sony that I just don't get on with ergonomically.

Don't get me wrong, I'm open minded, and if Sony beat them to it, with a nice ergonomically improved "a7Riv" it would definitely be on my shortlist. I'm still open to the possibility of getting an a7Riii and Sony 90mm macro, and running it alongside my Canon DSLRs and lenses.

I'm not in a desperate hurry - my 5DS and 5DMkiv are pretty damn good and I really enjoy using them, I just get a bit frustrated at the amount of time I have to spend in post balancing sharpness and noise-reduction at high ISO.

I'm not going to argue about the definition of ergonomics - you know exactly what I mean, i.e. whether I'm "comfortable" with the viewfinder, grip, controls and menus. I simply prefer Canon in this respect.

I don't have issues with the menu or the control positioning. I could get used to the EVF - that's something I'd have to do even if I switched to a Canon mirrorless.

The problem really is that I simply find Canon cameras pleasurable to hold and comfortable to operate, whereas with Sony I feel completely detached from the product.

Note that I only feel this way about the a7 series and a9 - I very much prefer the a99ii, which is more DSLR-like, in fact I very nearly bought one a year ago.

AF joystick - I agree absolutely. It's one of the main reasons why I wouldn't consider an EOS-R, or any other model that relied on a touchscreen and a squidgy and poorly placed 4-way controller. But Canon have made it pretty clear that a pro-orientated model will have an AF joystick, and will abandon the silly EOS-R Mfn bar.

I do appreciate your enthusiasm for the Sony, and your convictions about its specification, performance and handling. Unlike many Sony fans you talk sense rather than spout fanboyist nonsense.

But, as I said, I'm not in a huge hurry. I'd rather take my time and have a camera that I'm happy with, than be nudged into buying a technically better product that just doesn't suit me or my way of working :-)

Thanks for the compliment. It's nice to know that some non Sony users actually read my posts rather than just reply to what they think I've said based on what camera I shoot.

"If I could have a camera with 50MP, dynamic range of 14 stops, a DXO "low light sports" rating of over 3000, and a burst speed of 7-8fps I'll be more than happy. I think Canon will deliver that in 2020."

I don't think they will. They will make a high mp camera but it will not have good AF or a fast enough read out for burst shooting. They will spin this as prioritising AF accuracy for the high res sensor.

It will have a large body but the touch bar will return. Canon will bolt on as many new features as they can, as an aspect of the mirrorless marketing strategy is it offers new technology. Most of Canon's core technologies in sensor and processing are largely unchanged so they will look to add 'sparkle' elsewhere.

Mine arrived last week. Just as DPR say, it's well placed as a second light weight body for those already with Canon kit. And it fits that roll well. I've tried the Sony A7, A7II, and A7RII and didn't get on with them (mostly silly things, but important to me). And this thing is much lighter than the A7II which everyone is comparing it with.For me, its a body I can take away with the family with a 'mah' zoom on it for the day (currently an old Tamron 28-200mm (+body+adapter: 945g)) and get prefectly good shots; and then have the option of putting a prime or 'L' zoom on it later if I fancy indulging my creative side a bit more.

I've handled it, it's going the right way and good value but just a bit plasticky for me. Some previous comments dont get that the Sony isn't an option for many of us, it's not even on the radar so this is good for the money.

I hope Dpreview made a comparaison between this Canon and the Sony A7II. One is a 2019 camera, the other a 2015 one, but same pixel count and similar price. There is many points to cover, like image quality, lenses, af, hanling, reactivity.

Paper specs do not even begin to tell the whole story. The Sony A7II was a mediocre camera; one of Sony's worst. It has poor AF, and it's colors are awful and very hard to fix. It doesn't feel too great; it's not fun to use. There's a reason why the A7III was the one to take off in this product line and not the A7II.

Sony made a big leap forward with its third generation, but the A7II is not really worth it.

And why is it that the only argument that Sony fans can offer in favor of their cameras is a spec list? It's like we are all robots and user experience doesn't count.

@Thoughts R Us - I really don't understand this "sony colors are awful" nonsense. I shoot both Canon and Sony, and I can barely see a difference, which disappears even more if you shoot RAW. People who shoot these cameras in the real world, such as myself, know this to be true. For example, watch this Canon-to-Sony switcher (at 4:00 into the video she talks about comparing the colors from the A7II and the 5DMKIII):https://youtu.be/KfzyZp1BOqo?t=236She has even posted comparison photos from both cameras, asking if people can tell the difference. And people can't tell the difference. So this "color" argument is just BS from desperate people grasping at straws.

BTW, I have an A7II and I am very pleased with it. I would gladly take it over an RP any day because it has a solid magnesium body, has IBIS, has a much better native lens selection, has 3rd party lens support, and takes a battery grip. The RP doesn't have any of these things. I'm really enjoying the A7II.

@Thoughts R Us You never used a7II, that is sure. a7ii made me switching from Canon 5dIII, and i never regret. And it has very good AF an colors, a7III much better for sure (i own it also) but i'm sure a7II easily kill this Crippled RP what is pretty impressive from 5 years old body

If you cannot hardly see a difference in colours between Sony and Canon then that is down to your eye sight and your perception of colour. Yes a lot people have problems with seeing colour differences but that does not go for everybody. So just because you cannot see it do not assume others cannot either.

@Stu 5 - Oh please. You want to *believe* you can see the differences because it fits your agenda. But the reality is that people really can't tell the difference in blind (no pun intended) tests. Would you want to bet your life on being able to tell the difference? Of course not, because you know you'd probably fail. And even if you *could* tell the difference, just make a custom profile for your camera. This is how pros get consistent colors from camera to camera, brand to brand, no matter what they are using or shooting.

Seriously, people are just grasping at straws now. And one of the last straws people are clinging to is this "colors" belief. And it's a really, really weak straw .

I used A7 II. It is not a modern camera today. Technically these are the only advantages of A7 II: IBIS and DR at base ISO.RP beats A7 II in all other areaa like better high-ISO capability, way better LCD with touch screen, better AF-S and AF-C, better colours (A7II and the original A7 have horrible colours, A7 III is vastly improved), better wireless connection, 4K, way better menus (and one that can be controlled with touchscreen) etc...

"Paper specs do not even begin to tell the whole story. The Sony A7II was a mediocre camera; one of Sony's worst."

The usual made up rubbish from you. The A7II received 82% and a Silver award at launch, indicating it was a good camera but not without fault. Trying to retcon the results to make it look a weak offering is despicable. Of course it was would be poor if it was released today - but it wasn't, it was released almost five years ago - which is a millennia in mirrorless development.

If you want to know what a mediocre camera is, look no further than the EOS R, which got 79% and NO AWARD right now.

79% makes the EOS R the lowest scoring Mid-range FF camera of all time. It scored less than the Pantax KII and the Nikon Df. It even scored less than the A7.

I salute Canon and their idea and hope this camera and its range is very successful. However the idea its the cheapest FF camera is nonsense. The Sony A7ii is cheaper and arguably better on every spec, inc IMHO handling. Anyway, good luck to Canon and Sony. all fine cameras

I don't think anyone is seriously claiming that the RP is the cheapest FF camera right now, what they're saying is that no other FF camera has been released at a lower price. The A7 and A7II has come down in price since the original release, and so will the Canon eventually.

Have you held the RP? I have the A7 III and I tried the RP, and with the grip extension, it's vastly superior to the A7 III. IMO it's tied with the G9 for most comfortable grip. I like the Sony for the tech inside, but its ergonomics are garbage.

I totally agree. I owned the A7II and sold it. I also currently own the Pana G9 and that is a fantastic camera to use. I picked up the RP this week and it’s really good. Not quite as good as the G9 for me but far better than the Sony.

I understand everyone is different but I’m not sure every comment here is based on actual use as opposed to two minutes holding a camera in a store. Or even worst, based on others opinion or brand loyalty.

Tried this in a shop the other day. Nice size chip and body feels fine, but way too slow for me. If you are used to almost instant verification that you have captured the moment, (one of the best features of good mirrorless cameras) this will disappoint. Also lack of IBIS is a deal-breaker in 2019 for me.

For $1300 I can get an A7II with magnesium body, IBIS with a kit zoom and a nifty fifty. Or another great magnesium body with much better everything in an XT3 or even for $899 an XT30 or A6400. Even an D750 or 6D classic are cheaper and better. Drop another couple hundred more and get a d810 a PRO grade camera. The more you look at what is available for $1300 the more you will realize how over priced this camera is in the real world.. not some list price world that manufacturers want you to live in.

ttran, what you are not getting is some of us want Canon for all the reasons I’m not sure you can ever understand. It may not be the best camera when comparing specs but it is the one many many people will choose. Go figure!

But hey tiger, you keep telling us how bad the Canon is and hopefully you will feel better, and maybe someone out there will change their mind and purchase the Sony based on your reasoning.

If all those cameras would have been an option for me, I would have bought one long time ago, but each of them has drawbacks which I did not want. For the RP I feel the same but at least it comes cheap out of the gates.

Thing is for a bit more money a Sony A7III beats your whole selection of old compromises. So if you cannot afford the more expensive and better options you can as well take the RP which will provide nice images in a lot of situations.

None of those superior-spec'd from Nikon, Sony, Fuji cameras have one. Canon has burrowed its way to an overpriced niche product that is exactly what people have been asking for a while now: FF, 4K, headphone and mic jacks and mirrorless.

This product is unique, whether we like it or no. From a marketing standpoint, it's very well-rounded.

Specs, specs and more specs... like if that really matters to make better pictures. I have my Canon 5D Classic with its primitive specs and as far as I know still offers beautiful IQ. Even without IBIS, eye-AF or touch screen! Weird right?

This RP is a junky camera with a primitive interface and terrible video. It's a bit of a slap in the face to Canon users who waited five years for Canon mirrorless to be confronted with the R (silly touchbar, no joystick or control wheel, horrid crop video with terrible rolling shutter) and now the RP (even worse video).

I'm in the market for a Canon mirrorless camera but so far none of the above. The silly part is that Canon had these ergonomic and video issues solved from the Canon 5DIII - seven years ago. A manufacturer steadily making their cameras worse over a period approaching a decade is an astonishing feat of modern engineering and cynicism.

Great idea – making junky, crippled cameras and selling them at a discount to permanently alienate generations of photographers and damage the brand for decades.

Your thinking is a short-sighted as Canon management. I was surprised by the photos of senior Canon execs from the interview article. They certainly look like career bureaucrats, civil servants. Fuji and Sony leadership have impressed me a great deal more. Canon still has great optical engineers and well-built and maintained optics factories but otherwise are in full-on stagnation, bleeding long-term market share.

Hopefully in a few years Canon will come to their senses and I'll be able to buy a Canon mirrorless to replace my Sony A7 III and supplement my 5DS R.

I'm just going to stop buying glass altogether until Canon issues a issue high performance smaller cameras with good ergonomics again (5D line has been brilliant but needs a mirrorless version with non-crippled video).

Yes, you can argue with sales numbers when those sales numbers are doing long term damage to the brand. Much lower sales than a *good* Canon mirrorless camera with non-crippled. Alienating existing advocates. Creating long term dissatisfaction among purchasers ("hey why are all my videos wonky dad?").

Detroit was selling a lot of lousy cars before the Toyota and Honda stole half the US car market in the 80's and 90's.

Why am I still considering Canon cameras/waiting for a good one? Because the glass remains excellent and the ergonomics of the 5D class of camera are still market-leading. I've tried to shoot sport with an A7 III two weekends in a row and it's been a fairly awful experience. It's impossible to follow the action properly with a mirrorless camera in comparison to a DSLR with its optical viewfinder (no disconnect between action, no eye adjustment when looking at game and then looking through the viewfinder, easy to follow the whole game).

"Clearly, we are not in that target group. Clearly, the've made their research and these "crippled" MILCs tick all the boxes with their focus groups."

I think it's simpler than that – it's a 'protect the Crown Jewels' strategy, i.e. the 1DX Mark II and the Cx00 cine cameras at all costs. Fortunately there are other manufacturers who have shown a greater interest in empowering photographers to shoot high quality video at all levels of their product range: Sony, Fujifilm and now it looks like Nikon.

Panasonic's S1 doesn't make this list due to the lens prices and the bulk of the package. It's a great camera but somehow just doesn't fit the list.

Canon's EOS RP is the company's latest entry-level full-frame camera, and it happens to be mirrorless. The company's previous entry-level full framer was the EOS 6D Mark II, and so we decided to take a look at how they stack up for different types of photography.

Canon's EOS RP may be small on the outside, but it's hiding a big 26MP full-frame sensor on the inside. We've been pushing forward with our full review and have updated our gallery with fresh shots, and have taken a look at how how it handles our studio test scene – see for yourself.

The EOS RP is Canon's second full frame mirrorless camera, built around the new RF mount, and comes with an aggressive launch price of $1300. While there are some inevitable compromises to be made at this cost, Chris and Jordan discovered that there's a lot to like about this pint-sized full-framer.

Latest in-depth reviews

360 photos and video can be very useful for certain applications (as well as having fun). The Vuze+ is an affordable 360 camera that supports both 2D and 3D (stereo vision) capture, and might be the best option for someone wanting to experiment with the 360 format.

The Mikme Pocket is a portable wireless mic with particular appeal to smartphone users looking to up their game and improve the quality of recorded audio without the cost or complexity or traditional equipment.

The 90D is essentially the DSLR version of the EOS M6 Mark II mirrorless camera that was introduced alongside it. Like the M6 II, it features a 32MP sensor, Dual Pixel AF, fast burst shooting and 4K/30p video capture. It will be available mid-September.

The S1H is a full frame mirrorless camera designed with videographers in mind and includes advanced features like 6K video capture, 4:2:2 10-bit internal recording, improved video scopes, high frame rate recording, Panasonic Varicam color science and more.

Latest buying guides

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at nine current models and chosen our favorites.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Whether you're new to the Micro Four Thirds system or a seasoned veteran, there are plenty of lenses available for you. We've used pretty much all of them, and in this guide we're giving your our recommendations for the best MFT lenses for various situations.

Blackmagic has announced an update to Blackmagic RAW that adds support, via plugins, to Adobe Premiere Pro and Avid Media Composer. Blackmagic also announced a pair of Video Assist 12G monitor-recorders with brighter HDR displays, USB-C recording and more.

Sony has announced the impending arrival of its next-generation video camera system, the FX9. The full-frame E-mount system is set to be released later this year with a 16-35mm E-mount lens to follow in spring 2020.

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

The Fujifilm X-A7 is the newest addition to the company's X-series lineup. Despite its relatively low price of $700 (with lens), Fujifilm didn't skimp on features. Click through to find out what you need to know about the X-A7.

The entry-level Fujifilm X-A7 improves upon many of its predecessor's weak points, including a zippier processor, an upgraded user experience and 4K/30p video capture. It goes on sale October 24th for $700 with a 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens.

Robert Frank's unconventional approach to photography and filmmaking defied generational constraints and inspired some of the most influential artists of the 20th century. He passed away today at age 94.

All three devices offer a standard 12MP camera plus, for the first time on an iPhone, an ultra-wide 13mm camera module. The 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max also retain the telephoto camera of previous generations.

Phase One's new XT camera system incorporates the company's IQ4 series of digital backs with up to 151MP of resolution and marries them to a line of Rodenstock lenses using the new XT camera body. The result is an impressively small package for one of the largest image sensors currently on the market - take a closer look here.

Phase One has announced its new XT camera system, which includes an IQ4 digital back, body (made up of a shutter release button and two dials) and a trio of Rodenstock lenses. The company is marketing the XT as a 'travel-friendly' product for landscape photographers.